"The Counsel and Warning of Humanism"

Last weekend Betty and I were at the National Storytelling Festival in Tennessee. I promise not to bore you with a "travelogue" of that experience. Just now, however, I will share a story which I heard there. You may be familiar with the story of Vedran Smailovic, Cellist of Sarajevo.

Vedran Smailovic was cellist for the Sarajevo Philharmonic Orchestra. In 1992 his life changed. On May 27, 1992 a bakery in Sarajevo happened to have flour and was making bread to be distributed to the starving people of Sarajevo, caught in the ethnic conflicts which battered the former Yugoslavia.

At four o'clock in the afternoon, a long line of people were waiting outside the bakery for bread. Suddenly a mortar shell fell in the middle of the line, killing 22 people outright and wounding many others. Vedran Smailovic looked out from his nearby apartment and saw the carnage. He determined he must do something.

Thereafter and for 22 days - one day for each of the people killed in the senseless attack - Vedran put on his tuxedo, worn usually only for concerts, and walked out into the middle of the street. At four o'clock precisely for 22 days, he set up a small stool next to the bomb crater and played a concert while mortars and bullets flew all around him.

". . . Day after day he made his unimaginably courageous stand for human
dignity, for civilization, for compassion, and for peace. . . . He was never
hurt, though his darkest hour came when, taking a little walk to stretch his
legs, his cello was shelled and destroyed where he had been sitting."
["The Cellist of Sarajevo," TUTTI CELLI Newsletter, September/ October, unknown year]

A CNN reporter asked Smailovic if he was not crazy for playing his cello while Sarajevo was being shelled. Smailovic replied, "You ask me am I crazy for playing the cello; why do you not ask if they are not crazy for shelling Sarajevo?"

Subsequently composer David Wilde wrote a piece celebrating Smailovic and his passionate prayer for peace, which Yo Yo Ma has played in concert.

I've told this story because it illustrates humanism at its best. I have asked you to think with me about the Sources of the Living Tradition which inform who we Unitarian Universalists are, and which inform our individual search for truth and meaning. The fifth Source is:

"Humanist teachings which counsel us to heed the guidance of
reason and the results of science, and warn us against
idolatries of mind and spirit."

The Hymnbook which we use, entitled "Singing the Living Tradition," is organized around the Sources. Who would imagine that in the same hymnbook one could find Martin Luther's great hymn, "A Mighty Fortress is our God," or "Isaac Watts' traditional, "O God our Help in Ages Past," along with great hymns of humanist understanding such as "Where Is Our Holy Church" which we sang as this service began. The words to that hymn were written by Edwin H. Wilson, one of the editors of "The Humanist Manifesto."

The Humanist Manifesto of 1933 was written and edited primarily by Unitarians. Over half of the people who signed the "Manifesto" were Unitarians, most of whom were Unitarian clergy. One of the authors of the "Manifesto" was Curtis Reese, who happened to grow up in Western North Carolina. Reese was a Baptist who became a Unitarian . . . about 75 years ago. I'm not so unusual!

This Unitarian Universalist Source dealing with Humanist Teachings is not humanism in general. Humanism, as is true for all philosophical ideas is open to interpretation, some good, some not so good. One cannot read "The Humanist Manifesto" of 1933 and think it refers to "secular humanism." The term, "religious humanism" is used throughout the document.

My understanding of humanist teachings is that the emphasis is placed on humanity, on humane humanity, on thoughtful humanity which exercises intelligence freed from the ancient superstitions which for too long plagued human life.

The original "Humanist Manifesto" along with the second and third "Manifestos" express concern about some older religious forms which are outmoded and shown to be false by modern science. An obvious example is scientific medicine, which can now diagnose illness freed from incantations to "evil spirits."

One of the benefits of humanism can be seen in modern therapy for persons with mental illness, particularly when compared with the inhumane treatment of such persons in previous centuries. "Humanist teachings" which counsel human responsibility is surely a giant step in the right direction. People may no longer escape the responsibilities of life with the old cop-out, "God's will." In a very real sense, humanist teaching has reiterated the Biblical understanding of individual responsibility.

Humanist emphasis on the "guidance of reason" including reason in matters of religious understanding is a huge leap forward from mindlessness in religious expression. For too long people were expected to "check their brains in the foyer" before entering the sanctuary for worship. Humanist teachings are a significant and beneficial reminder that intelligence is a gift to be used; that scientific truth is not to be feared. Religious understanding can be enriched by critical thinking.

Here is an example of what I mean. My Son, who works at USC, sent an article about a book by a USC Professor of Sociology with the title, "Good Intentions are not Enough for Faith-Based Efforts." Professor Lichterman has spent several years studying volunteer efforts by church groups. He has learned that compassion alone is not good enough. Too frequently well-intentioned church people dropped out of programs or dropped the programs due to failure of critical thinking about and building relationships with the people they were serving.

Humanism worthy of the name is a combination of thinking with feeling with acting. I cannot remember when I was not influenced by what I now know to be "humanist teachings." My parents, who had by today's standards only a minimal education, always encouraged my siblings and me in the exercise of our brains. I can remember my Father's disdain for people who appealed to faith as in "Just have faith, brother!" My Father opted for thoughtful human responsibility informed by religions understandings.

When humanism is true to itself it is open to self- criticism. As Corliss Lamont says in one of the Readings for today, "(Humanism encourages) . . . unending questioning of basic assumptions . . . including those of humanism." The most thoughtful people I know are those who continually question their own assumptions.

I believe that is what is meant by the words at the conclusion of the Source which "warn us against idolatries of the mind and spirit." Just as we should question thoughtless religion, so we should question thoughtless humanism.

For example, in all three "Humanist Manifestos" there is a tendency to define religion in only one way - namely as doctrine. As I said a couple of weeks ago there is a significant difference between religious experience and religious doctrine. Theology or doctrine which is meant to help us understand our experiences may sometimes be substituted for experience, with the result that religion is identified as nothing more than creed or ideology. All three Humanist Manifestos seem unwilling to make the distinction between experience and doctrine.

There is also an implicit warning against the idolatry of scientific thinking. The best scientists seem to be in agreement that reality - even scientific reality - is not as real as it always seems. The "uncertainty principle" is just one of many
scientific theories which raise questions about scientific absolutism.

A few years ago I ran across an article in one of the airline magazines. The article described "fuzzy logic." My understanding is that computers were originally based on the absolute of binary logic. The zeroes and ones of binary computer programs seemed to be able only to make "either - or" decisions which could be "grossly inaccurate in complicated situations." Fuzzy Logic developed computer programs which, for example, could send elevators to floors most needed at rush hour; or which would sense when the food in the microwave was being overcooked and adjust the setting. Here is a summary of fuzzy logic taken from the article:

". . . fuzzy systems can respond more accurately to different situations
instead of having one static response to a variety of situations. . . . A
fuzzy system is much more precise and effective by accepting degrees
of truth rather than absolute truth." ["Fuzzy Logic in Focus," "Hemispheres,"
December, 1994, pp. 101-102.]

Now comes the "idolatry of mind" which this Source warns us about. When fuzzy logic was first introduced in 1965 it was "shunned by both industry and academia" in the United States. Evidently Western thinkers, adopting Aristotle's maxim that "everything must either be or not be" could not accept fuzzy logic. Interestingly the Japanese, unencumbered by Aristotle, incorporated "Fuzzy Systems" in their technology.

Of course the point just now is not computer programming. I also hope this sermon is not too "fuzzy" in either logic or presentation. My sense is that both the teaching of humanism and the results of science when used thoughtfully are beneficial and free us from some of humanity's inhumanity caused by earlier religious superstition. I also believe both humanist teachings and the results of science can be made into an idol equally as enslaving as ignorance.

In his chapter about humanist teachings in the study book which some of us are discussing on Sunday evenings, Forrest Church, Minister of All Souls UU Church in New York City writes:

"Some people hold that anything which is not rational is irrational
and, therefore, to be rejected; but reason suggests that beyond the
rational lies a transrational realm. . . . By ignoring this reality in a
narrow attempt to guard the portals of rationality against all
intruders, we betray the canons of both reason and science.

What is this "transrational realm" which Church mentions? Here is what he says:

"We enter (the transrational) in our dreams; we enter it in moments of
worship. We enter it in singing, when the tunes are good, even if the
words are not. We enter it in lovemaking and dancing and stargazing."
[John A. Buerhrens and Forrest Church, "A Chosen Faith," p.163]

One of the finest aspects of Unitarian Universalism is the rationality which recognizes that humanist teachings and the results of science have freed humanity in marvelous ways; freed from superstition, from fear, from dogma-induced guilt. But this marvelous rational aspect of Unitarian Universalism does not stand alone. Humanist teachings are enriched by the transrational aspect of "direct experience of transcending mystery," enriched by "the wisdom of the world's religions," enriched by "Jewish and Christian teachings." We UUs are both rational and transrational - head with heart. Our living tradition includes faith informed by humanist reasoning as well as reasoning informed by faith.

To say it another way we are a bridge between the rational and the transrational. To the degree we are thoughtful Unitarian Universalists we represent hope for critical thinking informed by openness to both religious experience and humanist understanding.

But there's more: we add action to reason and religion. When we are at our best we really are "a people of open minds, loving hearts, and helping hands." When we are at our best we are a matrix for thought, faith, and action. We have learned to live with the tension between objectivity and subjectivity. That tension does not mean anxiety-producing stress. Rather it is the tension similar to the strings of a cello which, when played make beautiful music.

The key is "when played." Vedran Smailovic acted on the basis of thought and faith when he went out into the war-torn streets of Sarajevo and acted as only he could; he played his cello. The Sources of the Living Tradition help us to think, to feel and to act. We do not expect some benevolent divine being to rush in to solve the problems of humanity. We are religious humanists who combine our understandings of faith and reason with action to alleviate human suffering. So be it. Amen.

Readings for October 16, 2005

"The time has come for widespread recognition of the radical changes in religious beliefs. . . . The time is past for a revision of traditional attitudes. Science and economic change have disrupted the old beliefs. Religions the world over are under the necessity of coming to terms with new conditions created by a vastly increased knowledge and experience." (The Humanist Manifesto, 1933)

". . . Humanism in a nutshell . . . rejects all forms of supernaturalism, pantheism and metaphysical idealism, and considers (humanity's) supreme ethical aim as working for the welfare of all humanity in this one and only life.
"Humanism, in accordance with the scientific method, encourages the unending questioning of basic assumptions . . . in every field of thought. This includes, of course, naturalistic humanism. Humanism is a developing philosophy ever open to testing newly discovered facts and rigorous reasoning." (Corliss Lamont)